She should be. At a minimum she's a power-hungry, scumbag liar. At worst she's a felon who has compromised American national security for her personal greed... and righteously deserves to be doing time in The Big House. Hard to imagine how anybody could consider her POTUS material... not even to the "37-41% diehard Leftists".
In reality, this very issue was big news in Canada last year, when it was revealed that a major Canadian bank was laying off IT workers and filling their roles with "temporary" foreign workers. I have serious doubts that there are no Canadians in Toronto with your specific IT skills, unless those skills are so narrowly defined by an HR department or hiring manager. Unfortunately, this is often true in Canada, HR departments are highly inefficient in staffing IT and are constantly behind the curve. With respect to Trump, he goes far beyond talking about what is "legal". He panders to the masses who feel aliens are killing their economic situation. What I am saying very clearly is taking his themes at face value, you would be out of a job in Toronto, because the bank would have to hire a Canadian.
What is happening here is that Republicans are letting the leftist media pick their nominee for them.
yes, per the theory it is. and anticipating your questions... per the theory, a runaway greenhouse effect can happen. which leads to the evaporation of greenhouse gases. why hasn't that happened? we are lucky the earth also has many negative feedback mechanisms to keep us in balance or in a range. Which makes attempting to figure out if adding man made co2 is causing warming or cooling. Adding co2 after some point may function more as a shield than a blanket. or co2 may cause cooling clouds. we just don't know.
Not my next question, but nice play. If you accept that water vapor is a greenhouse gas, then my question is: if one were to hold all other climate variables constant, and increase the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere, could we expect the atmosphere to warm?
I am not sure, but I think the answer is we do not know. last decade the idea was that co2 amplifies water vapor and that more water vapor means more clouds. but recent studies have shown more clouds could also mean cooling depending on if the clouds are high clouds or low clouds and if they are in tropical regions or not.
We don't know?? You often criticize FC for work which utilizes a greenhouse gas "1000 times" more powerful than CO2, but now you don't know?
you got it. if you were to live in an agw nutter troll's moccasins... he is the troll sob who goes around making statements about co2 destroying the world. I have told him that he is lucky the science is unsettled because if it were not he would be strung up as an eco terrorist by his buddies. Until the science is settled I have no problem with his job or yours in theory... he and perhaps you are the ones who should have a problems with making bigger carbon footprints. I understand bigger carbon footprints as long as we try to avoid waste and al gore, tom styer type hypocrisy/gluttony. and it was a new york times article that said the new a/c coolant is 2000 times more powerful than co2 and will be responsible for 25% of the coming warming.